djvh@drutx.UUCP (VanHandelDJ) (03/13/85)
>> >> I doubt it would open anything up. The five defenders >> would simply outline the key. The "middle" might be open >> but you wouldn't be able to get to the middle. > > I don't know about this. Would you give up a 8 foot baseline >shot? I admit it would hurt the offensive inside game a little >but it would require constant motion and would be exciting. I don't >like the man to man rule at all. Look at the knicks or lakers trapping >defense, isn't that exciting? Zones would add strategy and tactics to >the game. The passing game would be emphasized more to "break down" >the zone. Finally, the offensive rebounding would pick up since the >defense cannot just "camp" arround the basket for rebounds. > >I'm interested on how opinion is divided on this subject. > > schwady > Since I'm the guy that brought this idea up, I felt compelled to post to the net once again. There is no new rule coming out like this. However, I think there should be. For those of you who missed it, the idea is: - Allow the defense to play any kind of defense they want, but apply the 3-seconds-in-the-lane rule to both offense and defense. I also thought it might be a good idea to use the wider lane to keep the middle open. The only drawback I see is added pressure to the officials. - My reasoning for this rule is that any sport needs to have balance to remain interesting. Basketball has become a show for great offensive players. The defense is at a large disadvantage, which is unfair for the better defensive players. This would also add strategy to both offensive and defensive coaching. Good outside shooters would have more value also. Dave Van Handel